No. 20-1172
George Ponik, et al. v. Jamie Williams, Individually and as Administratrix ad Prosequendum of the Estate of Peter Lee Williams, Deceased, et al.
Response RequestedResponse Waived
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights due-process excessive-force law-enforcement objective-reasonableness qualified-immunity summary-judgment
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. May a Court refuse to engage in the requisite two step qualified immunity analysis, based solely on a decision that the more general liability question of excessive force should be left to a jury because a reasonable jury could find the defendant officer's action represented use of force that was not objectively reasonable under the circumstances?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
May a Court refuse to engage in the requisite two step qualified-immunity analysis
Docket Entries
2021-09-13
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
2021-08-06
Stipulation of dismissal under Rule 46 filed.
2021-05-10
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including June 21, 2021.
2021-05-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 21, 2021 to June 21, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-04-21
Response Requested. (Due May 21, 2021)
2021-04-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/30/2021.
2021-03-29
Waiver of right of respondent Estate of Peter Lee Williams, et al. to respond filed.
2021-02-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 29, 2021)
Attorneys
Estate of Peter Lee Williams, et al.
William Ludwig Mueller — Clemente Mueller, P.A., Respondent
George Ponik, et al.